At 12/12/2014 12:07:27 PM, airmax1227 wrote:Discussions of whether or not [any vote] is eligible (or should or shouldn't be generally) as well as discussions about broadening voting eligibility to include polls/opinion posts, should take place in another thread.

Please leave the main voting thread for voting, and discuss changes to the system here.

First, I would like to propose that next election uses the Poll section for an initial count. It's already clean and organized, you can change your vote at any time within the voting window causing it to automatically update the fields. There would then be a thread for discussion of any votes are ineligible.

Second, there should be some discussion over changes to eligibility for next election. As for the current election, I advise joining a game of mafia on the forums, or do a couple quick debates against other active users.

Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

what is the site stance on length of membership in regards to voting? There are a few people who have been (on or off) a mamber of DDO for a year yet only have completed a handful of debate and made a select amount of forum posts.

I have no strong opinion on the matter, but one thing I will make clear: The should be restrictions. The reason is simple: If we allow any account to vote simply because it belongs to one individual, then I could ask my family, relatives, and friends to make an account, vote, and disappear. They are members after all, are they not? There must be a standard, but what it should be, I will not claim to be fully decided on.

A certain amount of activity, like forum posts, poll voters, or something else, should be a minimum.

At 12/12/2014 1:25:56 PM, Mirza wrote:I have no strong opinion on the matter, but one thing I will make clear: The should be restrictions. The reason is simple: If we allow any account to vote simply because it belongs to one individual, then I could ask my family, relatives, and friends to make an account, vote, and disappear. They are members after all, are they not? There must be a standard, but what it should be, I will not claim to be fully decided on.

A certain amount of activity, like forum posts, poll voters, or something else, should be a minimum.

i agree with this. Half the reason why rules were made in the first place was I think to stop jimtimmy from sniping on completely new accounts to vote for him during an election....

At 12/12/2014 1:25:56 PM, Mirza wrote:I have no strong opinion on the matter, but one thing I will make clear: The should be restrictions. The reason is simple: If we allow any account to vote simply because it belongs to one individual, then I could ask my family, relatives, and friends to make an account, vote, and disappear. They are members after all, are they not? There must be a standard, but what it should be, I will not claim to be fully decided on.

A certain amount of activity, like forum posts, poll voters, or something else, should be a minimum.

I think everyone would concur. Proposed change

(1) Clarification on 3 debates with no FFs ( the person voting has to have no ffs in at least 3 debates)(2) 500 forum posts(3) 50 polls and 200 forum posts(4) (x) opinions and 200 forum posts

At 12/12/2014 1:27:16 PM, imabench wrote:i agree with this. Half the reason why rules were made in the first place was I think to stop jimtimmy from sniping on completely new accounts to vote for him during an election....

Even if multi-accounts were not to be allowed, which must be the rule, undoubtedly, then there should be requirements set apart from that one. As I said, if unique accounts all count, then I may as well make one for my grandmother, brother, or friend, or someone I find on the street, and ask them to vote. There needs to be proven membership, not just membership. What exactly that entails, we can all discuss.

At 12/12/2014 1:27:16 PM, imabench wrote:i agree with this. Half the reason why rules were made in the first place was I think to stop jimtimmy from sniping on completely new accounts to vote for him during an election....

Even if multi-accounts were not to be allowed, which must be the rule, undoubtedly, then there should be requirements set apart from that one. As I said, if unique accounts all count, then I may as well make one for my grandmother, brother, or friend, or someone I find on the street, and ask them to vote. There needs to be proven membership, not just membership. What exactly that entails, we can all discuss.

How about 1 started and completed quality debate, 10 substantiate forum posts, or 15 quality polls/opinions in the month prior to the election? Double for new members.

In addition to this, in the past six months, 3 debates, 50 forum posts, or 100 polls/opinions. (all of value)

At 12/12/2014 1:27:16 PM, imabench wrote:i agree with this. Half the reason why rules were made in the first place was I think to stop jimtimmy from sniping on completely new accounts to vote for him during an election....

Even if multi-accounts were not to be allowed, which must be the rule, undoubtedly, then there should be requirements set apart from that one. As I said, if unique accounts all count, then I may as well make one for my grandmother, brother, or friend, or someone I find on the street, and ask them to vote. There needs to be proven membership, not just membership. What exactly that entails, we can all discuss.

How about 1 started and completed quality debate, 10 substantiate forum posts, or 15 quality polls/opinions in the month prior to the election? Double for new members.

In addition to this, in the past six months, 3 debates, 50 forum posts, or 100 polls/opinions. (all of value)

That is way to subjective because you would have to define value by the mods perception

At 12/12/2014 1:27:16 PM, imabench wrote:i agree with this. Half the reason why rules were made in the first place was I think to stop jimtimmy from sniping on completely new accounts to vote for him during an election....

Even if multi-accounts were not to be allowed, which must be the rule, undoubtedly, then there should be requirements set apart from that one. As I said, if unique accounts all count, then I may as well make one for my grandmother, brother, or friend, or someone I find on the street, and ask them to vote. There needs to be proven membership, not just membership. What exactly that entails, we can all discuss.

How about 1 started and completed quality debate, 10 substantiate forum posts, or 15 quality polls/opinions in the month prior to the election? Double for new members.

In addition to this, in the past six months, 3 debates, 50 forum posts, or 100 polls/opinions. (all of value)

That is way to subjective because you would have to define value by the mods perception

I know, but it would be a loose definition.Basically, anything that brings value to the sight.So, no troll posts or debates, no pathetic "which rape is best" polls/opinions, no bump posts or rap battles (IMO). no who is hottest or what movie is best polls. Something that actually has substance and creates thought. Yes, this even does not include mafia posts.

I think it is obvious what a quality post/debate looks like: an honest attempt to discuss/debate/present an issue.

This idea would limit voters to those who are actually active and bring value to the site, as they are the people who make the site worthwhile.

At 12/12/2014 1:49:47 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:How about 1 started and completed quality debate, 10 substantiate forum posts, or 15 quality polls/opinions in the month prior to the election? Double for new members.

In addition to this, in the past six months, 3 debates, 50 forum posts, or 100 polls/opinions. (all of value)

At 12/12/2014 1:49:47 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:How about 1 started and completed quality debate, 10 substantiate forum posts, or 15 quality polls/opinions in the month prior to the election? Double for new members.

In addition to this, in the past six months, 3 debates, 50 forum posts, or 100 polls/opinions. (all of value)

No, that is too arbitrary.

Subjective, yes, but how is it arbitrary?Who are the people who should vote in your opinion?In mine, it is people who currently bring value to the site.If you aren't posting, you aren't bringing value.I'd rather have an activity/value requirement than a bottom line one.

If I don't post and sit back and watch and monitor the site, why should I vote?

At 12/12/2014 2:00:49 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:Subjective, yes, but how is it arbitrary?

The adjectives you added are not sufficiently explicated, or at all. What are substantiated posts?

Who are the people who should vote in your opinion?In mine, it is people who currently bring value to the site.If you aren't posting, you aren't bringing value.I'd rather have an activity/value requirement than a bottom line one.

Yes, so do I. I don't have details laid out; I am pointing out why your exact suggestions is not one I like much.

At 12/12/2014 12:07:27 PM, airmax1227 wrote:Discussions of whether or not [any vote] is eligible (or should or shouldn't be generally) as well as discussions about broadening voting eligibility to include polls/opinion posts, should take place in another thread.

Please leave the main voting thread for voting, and discuss changes to the system here.

First, I would like to propose that next election uses the Poll section for an initial count. It's already clean and organized, you can change your vote at any time within the voting window causing it to automatically update the fields. There would then be a thread for discussion of any votes are ineligible.

As long as we have volunteers from both sides checking votes, that seems fine to me.

Second, there should be some discussion over changes to eligibility for next election. As for the current election, I advise joining a game of mafia on the forums, or do a couple quick debates against other active users.

At 12/12/2014 12:07:27 PM, airmax1227 wrote:Discussions of whether or not [any vote] is eligible (or should or shouldn't be generally) as well as discussions about broadening voting eligibility to include polls/opinion posts, should take place in another thread.

Please leave the main voting thread for voting, and discuss changes to the system here.

First, I would like to propose that next election uses the Poll section for an initial count. It's already clean and organized, you can change your vote at any time within the voting window causing it to automatically update the fields. There would then be a thread for discussion of any votes are ineligible.

If this should be implemented, it would be quite difficult to keep track of who is eligible or not. We could specify you must add a comment with your vote (of certain words.) It would really help if we could automatically set guidelines/restrictions for a user to vote. I think the forums is still the way to go, but both are far from flawless.

Second, there should be some discussion over changes to eligibility for next election. As for the current election, I advise joining a game of mafia on the forums, or do a couple quick debates against other active users.

The guidelines should be somewhat restricted to debating- people who post in the forums could only be restricted to one section (religion, for example.) I think that this is the way to go:

At 12/12/2014 2:47:17 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:I don't like the lack of a secret ballot and the live vote count. Feels undemocratic

Yeah, I agree with this.

I agree with this sentiment to an extent. Sequential voting is problematic because of the perception that people might vote for the candidate that is already winning due to a popularity effect. But in most clubs and other organizations that follow Roberts Rules of Order, all voting is live, which means no anonymity. Non-secret voting is not inherently undemocratic.

The main problem is there is no truly unbiased way to implement a truly secret ballot on DDO. If you PM'ed your votes to the moderator, that would be just as problematic as non-secret voting because people know that the moderators supports one candidate over another. If the candidate the moderator supports wins, there would be a perception of unfairness by the losing side (not to say that the moderator would actually do anything untoward, but the perception of unfairness is just as problematic as the perceived unfairness of a non-secret ballot).

You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)

At 12/12/2014 12:07:27 PM, airmax1227 wrote:Discussions of whether or not [any vote] is eligible (or should or shouldn't be generally) as well as discussions about broadening voting eligibility to include polls/opinion posts, should take place in another thread.

Please leave the main voting thread for voting, and discuss changes to the system here.

First, I would like to propose that next election uses the Poll section for an initial count. It's already clean and organized, you can change your vote at any time within the voting window causing it to automatically update the fields. There would then be a thread for discussion of any votes are ineligible.

Second, there should be some discussion over changes to eligibility for next election. As for the current election, I advise joining a game of mafia on the forums, or do a couple quick debates against other active users.

They should fix the glitches on the opinion thread. Also the forums could use a fast forward button to take ppl to the latest comments.

"The annoying kid has a point. Let's revolt in this bitch!" - The Boondocks

At 12/12/2014 1:19:13 PM, Ragnar wrote:First, I would like to propose that next election uses the Poll section for an initial count. It's already clean and organized, you can change your vote at any time within the voting window causing it to automatically update the fields. There would then be a thread for discussion of any votes are ineligible.

If this should be implemented, it would be quite difficult to keep track of who is eligible or not. We could specify you must add a comment with your vote (of certain words.) It would really help if we could automatically set guidelines/restrictions for a user to vote. I think the forums is still the way to go, but both are far from flawless.

Actually if you just click the number of votes, it brings up the list of who in all voted that way. http://www.debate.org...

Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

At 12/12/2014 12:07:27 PM, airmax1227 wrote:Discussions of whether or not [any vote] is eligible (or should or shouldn't be generally) as well as discussions about broadening voting eligibility to include polls/opinion posts, should take place in another thread.

Please leave the main voting thread for voting, and discuss changes to the system here.

First, I would like to propose that next election uses the Poll section for an initial count. It's already clean and organized, you can change your vote at any time within the voting window causing it to automatically update the fields. There would then be a thread for discussion of any votes are ineligible.

Second, there should be some discussion over changes to eligibility for next election. As for the current election, I advise joining a game of mafia on the forums, or do a couple quick debates against other active users.

I think both are excellent points, and that you're advice is very good as well.